China's SCS Strategy Thread

abc123

Junior Member
Registered Member
You're forgetting why China needs most of that oil: to manufacture goods for the rest of the world.

In times of economic blockade, all it matters is that China produces sufficient oil for its own consumption.

Furthermore, China is developing land-based oil delivery lines, further improving its oil security.

The fact is, China is producing just about 1/3 of it's oil needs. Yes, there are land routes, but they have small capacity, not a lot- but let's be generous- let's say additional 10%. If China want's really improve it's oil security, they will need much more than one or two pipelines. Even then, these pipelines will be targets No1 in any future conflict.

About manufacturing, and what will Chinese workers that manufacture all those products do when China is under blocade and they can't export any more? Just look in the sky and smile, because they will not be fired or in unpaid leave?
 

abc123

Junior Member
Registered Member
Trade can only be wielded as a weapon if one side holds overwhelming advantages over the other. As it stands, it would be very difficult to argue that any nation, or even groups of nations, holds sufficient leverage against China.

Blockading China would have devastating consequences for the world economy, especially the developed nations that have come to take Chinese manufactured goods for granted. Massive lay-offs, cascading bankruptcies, astronomical inflation, civil unrest, and the collapse of institutions such as the EU, are just some of the likely consequences.

Not saying that it will be easy for anyone. But having your TV more expensive is one thing. Having no fuel or food is something completely different.
 

vesicles

Colonel
Firstly, I don't believe that.

Secondly, to establish some basic facts:

a) is China self-sufficient in oil production? No.

b) from where does China buys that oil? From all around the world.

c) How China delivers said oil? Mostly with tankers trough Strait of Malacca.

d) is the PLAN capable to defeat the US Navy in say, Indian Ocean or SCS and ensure free flow of oil? No, it isn't.

So, now: Of course that, during peace, US will not necessarilly destroy trade with China. But if, and that's not IF anymore, US sees China as No1 threat to it's global hegemony, why wouldn't they, during the war with stakes so high ( you can't say that global hegemony is a small thing ), use every weapon in their arsenal, including the blocade to break China into submission?

how does a blockade actually work with China? How effective is it against such a huge country? What does the US gain from such blockade?

I have no doubt that China will suffer from a blockade. However, based on how integrated the Chinese economy is with the world, other countries will suffer as well. How many countries would be willing to go through that given how fragile the world economy is? Especially when this is about SCS, where the conflict would most likely be about a few uninhabitable islands. Even if it is about Taiwan, very few countries would be willing to do it, given how most countries have given up diplomatic relationship with the island when China demands it. I doubt very much that most countries would be willing to damage their economy for Taiwan.

How effective can a blockade against China be? Again, no doubt that China would suffer. But by how much? No blockade can be absolute. I am sure no matter how many countries actually get on board with it, equal amount of countries will take advantage of the vacuum and begin to trade with China. that's a lot of money! That's simply too many jobs saved/created and so many new votes for any politician to look away. Can anyone say that they wouldn't be tempted?

Then there is the shear size of China. China's huge domestic market will support economy of any size. Yes, oil is important and China needs a lot of oil import now. However, in time of a blockade, China will simply save oil and make everything manually. Keep in mind that China has that huge population. Instead of using modern machines that use up huge amount of energy, China will conserve energy by starting "sweat shops" again and manufacturing goods in manual ways and by hands. Oil/Energy will be focused exclusively on defense matters (making weapons and keeping sophisticated weapons running) to hold out until the blockade ends / winning the war.

the next question is how much the US will gain. I think people have been doing the wrong comparison. Most analyses show that China would suffer a lot more than the US would in time of a war between them. I have no doubt of that. Yes, at current state, the US will no doubt win a war against China and China would suffer more. But the correct question for the US is: how much will we gain from fighting a war with China vs. not fighting with them? In other words, would the US gain more fighting a war/ implementing a blockade, when compared with not fighting / without blockade at all?

The logic behind any decision should not be "how much can we hurt others", but "how much can we benefit from it." We shouldn't do something, even if it hurts others more than ourselves. We should do something when it benefits us.
 

vesicles

Colonel
Again, I think we have been asking the wrong question. the question is NOT how much it would hurt China, BUT how much China's opponents would potentially gain.

Instead of focusing on how much China would suffer in a blockade, we should ask "would a blockade actually benefit the US?" And by how much? What about the cost of implementing the blockade? What is the cost vs. profit of blockading China? Can anyone afford it? Can anyone benefit from it?
 

solarz

Brigadier
The fact is, China is producing just about 1/3 of it's oil needs. Yes, there are land routes, but they have small capacity, not a lot- but let's be generous- let's say additional 10%. If China want's really improve it's oil security, they will need much more than one or two pipelines. Even then, these pipelines will be targets No1 in any future conflict.

About manufacturing, and what will Chinese workers that manufacture all those products do when China is under blocade and they can't export any more? Just look in the sky and smile, because they will not be fired or in unpaid leave?

Not saying that it will be easy for anyone. But having your TV more expensive is one thing. Having no fuel or food is something completely different.

You vastly overestimate the effects of a blockade on China, and underestimate the effects on the enforcers of such a blockade.

First, the amount of oil China uses right now is not the same as the amount it needs to function as a self-sufficient economy. The two are not even remotely comparable.

The Western media has suffered from 30 decades of wishful-thinking when it comes to China, and you are showing yourself to be a product of that media. Somehow, you really believe that if a foreign nation or nations enact a blockade against China, the people of China will blame their government instead of those nations enacting the blockade? I guess you also believed that Iraqis would happily embrace their "liberators" once Saddam was removed from power. Nothing legitimizes a government more than having a visible enemy. Just look at Cuba. 50 years of US embargo and the Castro government is as soildly entrenched as ever.

Second, if China was just a TV manufacturer, then you would be right. However, China produces a lot more than just TVs. Almost every consumer product, from toothbrushes to smartphones, are made in China. A trade war with China (which is essentially what a blockade would amount to), means practically every facet of the economy will be affected.

If you're in retail, you're now out of a job since nobody can afford to buy anything.

If you're in construction, you're also out of a job as real estate prices have crashed, and the government doesn't have any money to invest in infrastructure after the dual shock of reduced tax revenue and ever growing social welfare payments.

If you're in IT, you're also out of a job as the client you were building that spiffy new app for had just gone bankrupt.

If you're in finances, you probably jumped out of a building weeks ago.

If you're a farmer, then you could probably grow enough food to feed yourself and your family. Assuming you can afford the sky-rocketing electricity rates.
 

nugroho

Junior Member
Firstly, I don't believe that.

Secondly, to establish some basic facts:

a) is China self-sufficient in oil production? No.

b) from where does China buys that oil? From all around the world.

c) How China delivers said oil? Mostly with tankers trough Strait of Malacca.

d) is the PLAN capable to defeat the US Navy in say, Indian Ocean or SCS and ensure free flow of oil? No, it isn't.

So, now: Of course that, during peace, US will not necessarilly destroy trade with China. But if, and that's not IF anymore, US sees China as No1 threat to it's global hegemony, why wouldn't they, during the war with stakes so high ( you can't say that global hegemony is a small thing ), use every weapon in their arsenal, including the blocade to break China into submission?

Can US order Russia to block gas to China? No.
Can US order Iran not to sell oil to China? No
Maybe in a short time there will be lack of energy, but can be overcome by diverting to coal ( dont argue about pollution in blocade ) etc.
And above that:
Can United States of America unitedly blocade China? ( Remember, just a small matter between Hillary and Trump, a lot californian voted for Calexit)
How can Federal Reserve deal with high inflation because no more cheap stuff?
 

Zool

Junior Member
You can tariff or embargo products and categories of trade, but you guys are talking about Blockade which is a whole other level of relationship fallout.

Blockade of China would be a hostile act and require the use of force by opposition Naval and Air Power. China has its own merchant shipping which would run a blockade. Any shooting or sinking would open up the escalation ladder and would move quickly into full scale war. It wouldn't be in China's interest to suffer containment without dealing pain the mainland of its own opponents. Something I'm sure all parties are aware of.
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
The fact is, China is producing just about 1/3 of it's oil needs. Yes, there are land routes, but they have small capacity, not a lot- but let's be generous- let's say additional 10%. If China want's really improve it's oil security, they will need much more than one or two pipelines. Even then, these pipelines will be targets No1 in any future conflict.

About manufacturing, and what will Chinese workers that manufacture all those products do when China is under blocade and they can't export any more? Just look in the sky and smile, because they will not be fired or in unpaid leave?

Where you get the figure that china only produce 1/3 of their oil need. Last time I check China only import 50% of their energy need.
But that number is skew due to China taking advantage of low oil price and stockpiling their oil reserve. She has been buying enormous amount of energy in the last 2 or 3 years and filling up the reserve. China has one of the largest oil stockpile in the world
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China can built oil line very fast and there is no supply shortage .In emergency Russia and central Asia has no problem filling up China need.You can built oil line very fast 2 years the most. There are more than 4 parallel line connecting Central Asia to China .Try to blockade that
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

You also forget China has oil terminal in Burma Kyauk pyu island connecting it with oil pipe line to Yunnan
With Oil And Gas Pipelines, China Takes A Shortcut Through Myanmar

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Subscriber

Economic, political and social news on China.

Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.

On the 29th of January, China opened, with little fanfare, a new oil link through Myanmar. Despite its low profile, this project has clearly been a huge undertaking, both technologically and politically. This 2,400km long pipeline runs through some of the most rugged areas on the planet, marked by jagged hills and ridges and dense jungle. On top of that, two stretches of the pipeline traverse two of Southeast Asia’s political hotspots, the Rakhine and Shan States, which retain semi-autonomous armies that have only just recently been nominally pacified.

The new route however, has one invaluable advantage in eyes of Chinese leaders: it bypasses the Malacca straits, whose infamous waters are infested with pirates. A 300,000 ton super tanker recently discharged its oil at the new deepwater port located on Maday Island—the first time this had happened—marking the start of new pipeline’s operation. That oil will now flow to Kunming, the capital of the southeast Chinese province of Yunnan, which borders Myanmar. The pipeline shortens the distance the oil will have to travel by sea to reach China by 700 miles. It also cuts by 30% the time this liquid black gold will take to get to the Middle Kingdom.

shwe-gas.jpg

(Image: Shwe Gas Movement)

Avoiding the Malacca detour had the other, even more invaluable advantage in the eyes of the Chinese leadership. With 80% of all imported hydrocarbons to China going through the Malacca sea-route, China is vulnerable to having its overseas energy supplies blockaded by the American 6th Fleet during a Sino-U.S. geopolitical crisis. The Burmese pipeline diminishes that risk, as the oil and natural gas will no long have to pass through the Malacca Straits chokepoint.

Parallel to the oil pipeline of Maday, another link has been functioning since October last, from the sea port of Kyaukpyu, which is dedicated to methane. This pipeline has already transported to China four billion cubic meters of methane from both Burmese and Middle Eastern (Qatari) sources.
Central Asia’s Oil and Gas Now Flows to the East
Central Asia’s energy resources are increasingly flowing not to Russia, but to China and emerging Asian economies.

By Michael Hart
August 18, 2016
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Over the past decade, Central Asia has emerged as
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
as the world’s demographic and economic center has shifted decisively eastward. Western reliance on Middle Eastern oil has long dominated the global energy industry, yet the rapid development of Central Asia’s energy infrastructure has made it a region that finally looks ready to fulfill its potential in delivering the burgeoning energy needs of Eurasia.

Central Asia has long possessed large volumes of oil and natural gas, predominantly located in the five former Soviet republics situated to the east of the Caspian Sea: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. Historically, the persistence of Soviet influence over Central Asia’s energy sector led to the majority of Caspian oil and gas to flow north to Russia, and from there onward to the industrialized consumer countries of Western Europe. However, the picture has altered significantly since the turn of the century: access has been opened to new markets in the east, and Central Asia now plays a vital role in meeting the growing energy needs of China.

For decades, Central Asia’s energy infrastructure remained underdeveloped, with producers in the region struggling to transform their raw natural resources into output, while also having difficulty finding reliable methods of delivery. In general, the five states relied on more experienced international companies to provide export routes – often through aging pipelines to Russia – enabling secondary access to markets in the west. The Central Asian states sought to diversify their export destinations after the collapse of the Soviet Union, yet were often viewed as unreliable partners and risky investment opportunities by many Western corporations. Additionally, with the Caspian Sea being landlocked, the absence of a complex pipeline system to transport resources to Europe proved to be another sticking point. The result was a stagnation of the region’s energy industry as the West’s reliance on Middle Eastern oil continued, leaving vast resource-rich areas of Central Asia underexplored and large quantities of oil and gas untapped.
 
Last edited:

advill

Junior Member
There are NO winners in any trade war or worse still a real War. Nukes will then be used as a last resort. We will observe the use of HARD Power in negotiations in coming months/years, but hopefully SMART Power (Problem Solving) should be used by the parties concerned. Never underestimate an opponent or other party. Business is different from a nation's diplomatic issues/relationship. While the former uses all sorts of tactics (including fair & foul means) to win contract/s, the latter requires level-headed diplomats & leaders dealing with very serious national issues. A lesson from Confucius: "Everyone wants to be rich and powerful. But it is better to attain it than to use unscrupulous means to acquire it. No one wants to be poor and despised. But it is better not to be free from it than use dishonest means to escape from it".
 

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
With the US energy independent, there's a glut of oil in the world. Oil is cheap and without the US buying foreign oil, don't think oil exporters are going to obey the US in restricting the flow of oil especially to China. Yeah the US is energy independent and oil nations are going to help the US destroy China's economy so that the next biggest oil user buys less oil. Is Trump going to start buying Russian oil to replace China?
 
Top